lllyasviel / lllyasviel/ControlNet

Much Worse test result when using gradio_canny2image.py than validation result.

Open
#417 8 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Dominant language
Python
Stars
34.1k
Forks
3k
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

Hi Thanks for your great work.
I've trained Controlnet using Canny Edge.
After 30 epoch, the validation images in image_log show quite realistic good results.
So I used the model and run gradio_canny2image.py and tried with a lot of different parameter settings like CFG, but it shows always so bad result compared to the validation results.
Is there any difference between validation process or parameter settings and web version?

Please help me~!
Thank you!

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start with gradio_canny2image.py and compare its inference parameters and process with the validation process that produced the image_log results. Reproduce the mismatch using the reported trained Canny Edge model and varied CFG settings. Done means identifying and documenting the validation-versus-web-version difference, or confirming that the issue cannot be reproduced with the available details.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
python
Domain
machine-learning
Issue type
Bug
Difficulty
4/5
Estimated time
3-5 days
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
28/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.